Why the study?
Recommendations and options are rapidly changing for patients with submassive or massive pulmonary embolism with hemodynamic instability, with both catheter-based and surgical approaches offering distinct benefits and risks.
This review outlines the evolving surgical and catheter-based management options for patients with submassive or massive pulmonary embolism.
Catheter-based options may be considered in unstable PE; leaves open optimal selection pending randomized comparisons.
Pulmonary embolism is the third most common cardiovascular syndrome with an estimated up to 25% of patients presenting with sudden death. For those who survive, a mainstay of management for patients with hemodynamic stability is anticoagulation; however, recommendations and options are rapidly changing for patients with submassive or massive pulmonary embolism with hemodynamic instability. Catheter-based and surgical approaches offer efficacious management options for unstable patients or patients with contraindications to anticoagulation; however, both approaches have inherent benefits and risk. This article seeks to offer a brief review on the recommendations and options for management of pulmonary embolism from both surgical and catheter-based perspectives.
No takes yet. Share an insight, caveat, or question.
Tohme et al. (2022) conducted a review in Pulmonary embolism. Catheter-directed therapies and surgical pulmonary embolectomy vs. Optimal medical therapy was evaluated.
Synapse has enriched 5 closely related papers on similar clinical questions. Consider them for comparative context: